Franchot, check the tweet just posted in the political covid thread, Newsome just predicted 25.5 million in CA will be infected in 8 weeks. That may just be extrapolating from a pool of data that's too small and taken before we did what we did, but still nobody thinks it'll be over soon.

It's possible that most of the U.S. population has already been infected, but hasn't gotten sick, and so hasn't gotten tested.

The death rate is calculated by dividing the number of people who die by the number who are infected. So far they're saying that it's a few percent.

But while we do have accurate information about the numerator, we really have no idea what the denominator is. It's possible that the real denominator is magnitudes bigger than what is being reported, because most infected people have no symptoms, and thus, don't get tested. If this is indeed the case, then it's possible that the real death rate is far, far lower than the few per cent that is being reported.

I absolutely positively do not understand why no one bats an eye when 10,000 people die from the flu, but the very same people got all hysterical after a few dozen people died from COVID-19.

And how many of these people who panicked after a few dozen people died from COVID-19 didn't get a flu shot? How many of them don't wear a seat belt? How many of them smoke cigarettes?

Maybe it's my Asperger's, maybe it's my love of math, maybe it's my preference for facts over emotion, but whatever it is, I do not understand the double standard regarding the flu and COVID-19.

In situations like that, my own personal preference is to use a regular amount of toilet paper, and then take a shower.

Franchot

03-19-20 06:00 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13707847)

But while we do have accurate information about the numerator, we really have no idea what the denominator is. It's possible that the real denominator is magnitudes bigger than what is being reported, because most infected people have no symptoms, and thus, don't get tested. If this is indeed the case, then it's possible that the real death rate is far, far lower than the few per cent that is being reported.

Yes, I agree with your analysis.

kefrank

03-19-20 06:00 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13707847)

Maybe it's my Asperger's, maybe it's my love of math, maybe it's my preference for facts over emotion, but whatever it is, I do not understand the double standard regarding the flu and COVID-19.

For someone who claims to love math and facts, you're apparently ignoring a lot of readily available math and facts that make it obvious why COVID-19 is dramatically more dangerous than the seasonal flu.

Josh-da-man

03-19-20 06:20 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13707847)

I absolutely positively do not understand why no one bats an eye when 10,000 people die from the flu, but the very same people got all hysterical after a few dozen people died from COVID-19.
[...]
Maybe it's my Asperger's, maybe it's my love of math, maybe it's my preference for facts over emotion, but whatever it is, I do not understand the double standard regarding the flu and COVID-19.

In a nutshell: It's more virulent than the flu, has a longer incubation period, and a higher fatality rate. The 10x higher hospitalization rate means that it can quickly overwhelm our healthcare system, requiring more manpower, equipment, and hospital beds than we currently have to give.

And, unlike the flu, there is no vaccine and no herd immunity.

Kurt D

03-19-20 06:43 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13707847)

I absolutely positively do not understand why no one bats an eye when 10,000 people die from the flu, but the very same people got all hysterical after a few dozen people died from COVID-19.

You've been quite clear about this and I don't think any amount of reasoning will make you change your mind. So I ask you this, where has your outrage over flu deaths been, for the last two decades of this board's life? ;)

grundle

03-19-20 07:39 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franchot
(Post 13707904)

I'm in LA county and it "appears" today that several mayors and health officials are going to put a "shelter in place" mandate like the one in San Francisco for Los Angeles county.

While, I'm sheltering in place, I'll put together a group of 10 well-known individuals who have tested positive for the coronoavirus and watch as they progress to a recovered status or to something less favorable. My skeptical mind says 90% or more of my group will reach a recovered status.

If you want a big sample. pick China with 81 K confirmed cases, or the whole world with 250 K. Why choose a cruise ship with its own specific conditions and population?

grundle

03-20-20 12:47 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psi
(Post 13708000)

If you want a big sample. pick China with 81 K confirmed cases, or the whole world with 250 K. Why choose a cruise ship with its own specific conditions and population?

Because on the cruise ship, everyone was tested, not just people with symptoms.

And to quote myself from an earlier post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13707847)

It's possible that most of the U.S. population has already been infected, but hasn't gotten sick, and so hasn't gotten tested.

The death rate is calculated by dividing the number of people who die by the number who are infected. So far they're saying that it's a few percent.

But while we do have accurate information about the numerator, we really have no idea what the denominator is. It's possible that the real denominator is magnitudes bigger than what is being reported, because most infected people have no symptoms, and thus, don't get tested. If this is indeed the case, then it's possible that the real death rate is far, far lower than the few per cent that is being reported.

The cruise ship is the only scenario where the denominator is accurate, because everyone on the cruise ship was tested.

Psi

03-20-20 01:20 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708138)

Because on the cruise ship, everyone was tested, not just people with symptoms.

And to quote myself from an earlier post:

The cruise ship is the only scenario where the denominator is accurate, because everyone on the cruise ship was tested.

Data from the cruise ship, no matter how complete it was, was representative of nothing more than just that cruise ship, with its specific configuration, population and the way they were quarantined. It doesn't say anything of the real world in any country.

And these numbers matter little now. We can all see what Covid-19 can do to people health and national economy. Keep yourself happy playing with numerators and denominators.

grundle

03-20-20 08:47 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franchot
(Post 13708154)

Newsom's newest mandate might be helpful in slowing the spread the virus (I guess that is what he is shooting for, so that the hospitals aren't overrun with patients), but until everyone is tested in the state, the virus will just continue to expand.

Those people out and about doing their jobs and those people who are sheltered at home and merely visiting the supermarket or other services, can pick up the virus and spread the virus if this chart is accurate:

It seems to me that a supermarket would be a far more effective way to spread the virus than a movie theater. At the supermarket, you touch lots of things that have been touched by lots of other people, and you bump into lots of other people. Whereas at a movie theater, you're just sitting in your chair most of the time. As long as people are going to the supermarket anyway, I don't see any point in keeping movie theaters closed.

was considered a higher-risk patient with a history of asthma and childhood bronchitis. He also had undergone testicular cancer surgery in 2016.

It seems that almost everyone who has died from this already had at least one kind of potentially fatal comorbidity.

Very, very few people who die have COVID-19 as their only serious illness.

fujishig

03-20-20 09:00 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708240)

It seems to me that a supermarket would be a far more effective way to spread the virus than a movie theater. At the supermarket, you touch lots of things that have been touched by lots of other people, and you bump into lots of other people. Whereas at a movie theater, you're just sitting in your chair most of the time. As long as people are going to the supermarket anyway, I don't see any point in keeping movie theaters closed.

This is bait, right?

On a side note we were talking about scalpers in one of the threads. At least Costco won't let them return items (though I think there will be a shortage for some time so the scalpers will probably still make money):

It seems to me that a supermarket would be a far more effective way to spread the virus than a movie theater. At the supermarket, you touch lots of things that have been touched by lots of other people, and you bump into lots of other people. Whereas at a movie theater, you're just sitting in your chair most of the time. As long as people are going to the supermarket anyway, I don't see any point in keeping movie theaters closed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fujishig
(Post 13708250)

This is bait, right?

No, it's not bait. I'm completely serious.

Also, I'd be curious to hear what sociologists, economists, statisticians, actuaries, etc., think about the potential increase in suicide and drug addiction due to all the unemployment that is being caused by shutting so many things down. How likely is it that these shutdowns could actually end up causing more deaths than they prevent?

I know this sounds cold, but for actuarial purposes, the average human life is valued at approximately $7 million dollars, and it's certainly possible that these shutdowns are causing more harm than good. Even if there were no extra deaths due to suicide and drug addiction, it's still very harmful for people to have to skip their jobs, school, etc. If each life that gets saved costs $20 million in lost productivity, then a cold-hearted person such as myself could argue that it caused more harm than good, even if there was no increase in suicide or drug addiction. I would be perfectly happy to volunteer my own city (Pittsburgh, PA) for an experiment where movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc., would all remain open, and then compare the effects on my city to all the cities where things were shut down.

We didn't shut everything down when 10,000 people died from the flu. Someone, somewhere, decided that it would be better to keep the movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc., open. That was a very cold hearted decision, but it was based on a large number of professionals who ran the numbers, and decided to do it.

grundle

03-20-20 10:14 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Singapore has been repeatedly praised for its successful actions at limiting the spread of the virus.

Singapore's schools have not been closed.

This is an opinion column, but it's written by an expert in the field, and was published by the New York Times. I happen to agree with it. If anyone here disagrees with it, I'd be curious to hear your reason(s) for your disagreement.

Shutdowns could likely do more harm than good, since there’s little evidence that children are a major source of the spread.

By Jennifer Nuzzo

Dr. Nuzzo is a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

March 10, 2020

Facing an accelerating spread of Covid-19, Italy and Japan have closed schools to impede the epidemic. Some communities in the United States have done so too, agreeing to significantly disrupt people’s lives on the theory that it will prevent deaths and serious illness.

But there is no clear evidence that such measures will slow this outbreak.

Most of what we know about the impact of school closings on disease transmission relates to influenza, to which children can be particularly vulnerable, sometimes dying or becoming seriously ill from it.

Children are important drivers of influenza infections because they have more interactions with people than do most adults and also give off more of the virus. Closing schools, it is assumed, reduces the number of contacts and thus the rate of transmission.

During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, schools across the country were closed. A C.D.C. study showed that parents largely supported these measures, but other studies found that children frequently got together outside the home or visited public sites, despite official recommendations not to do so. Fortunately, schools reopened in less than three days in most cases because data showed the flu strain wasn’t as severe as had been feared.

Still, some evidence suggests that these measures didn’t reduce the number of infections and only slowed the spread — although that could help reduce burdens on health systems.

That’s influenza, though. Covid-19 is different.

There have been very few reports of children contracting Covid-19. It’s not clear why. It’s possible that children do get infected, but so mildly that it is not noticed or tested.

If children don’t experience severe illness from or contribute to the spread of Covid-19 — and so far we have found no clear evidence that they do — it’s likely that school closings will have little effect on its spread.

Not all affected countries have closed schools. Singapore, which has been heralded for its response to Covid-19, decided that closing schools would do more harm than good. Political leaders and health officials there have addressed concerns about Covid-19 through clear, consistent and transparent communications about their response to the virus.

If schools remain open, officials could enact measures to limit any potential spread among children and staff. All students could be checked daily for fever, a possible sign of Covid-19 infection. Even more attention should be given to hand washing and reminding children not to touch their faces. Children should be taught to sneeze into their sleeves. Schools can consider changing seating arrangements to keep children six feet apart. As the weather warms, lessons can be taken outside, if possible.

Nonetheless, government officials may feel pressure to close schools. For true effectiveness, schools need to close before even 1 percent of the population is infected and they need to stay closed until the epidemic is over, which could mean months. Children couldn’t gather in other settings, which would be very difficult to enforce.

If schools close, child care programs will likely close too and working parents may have to stay home to watch their children. Health care and critical infrastructure workers would not be able to do their jobs for the same reason. Those parents may not be paid, which would be a tremendous hardship. States would have to consider expanding unemployment benefits and help employers to allow workers to stay home if needed.

Communities would need to feed and educate children while they are out of school. Closing schools can interrupt social services like programs that provide lunches to more 30 million children and breakfast to 11 million. For some children, including homeless youth, schools can be the safest place and denying these children access may deny them much needed support, even something as basic as a place to wash their clothes.

Children will need to continue learning. Interruptions in education can profoundly harm child development and make it harder to reduce the achievement gap between high- and low-income families. Schools may consider online education as an alternative but need to ensure that all families have access to the technologies required for these approaches.

If schools close, knowing when to reopen them would be difficult. To have any public health impact, school closings would have to be maintained for the duration of the epidemic.

State and local governments will have to clearly explain the reasons for closing schools and how they would decide to reopen them so parents and employers can plan how to manage daily routines.

Above all, officials need to be honest about what is known and what isn’t about the impact of these measures.

Though there may be an inclination to present school closings as a well-established tool to protect public health, their full impact is simply unknown.

Downplaying the disruption these measures may cause or overstating their benefits can erode public confidence in government at a time when it is needed the most.

Jennifer Nuzzo is a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and an associate professor at the university’s school of public health.

grundle

03-20-20 11:27 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunkaroo
(Post 13708350)

Until we know if children are spreading it without showing symptoms, schools should be closed.They have the worst hygiene. They will contaminate everything. Not worth the risk right now.

What you're saying seems to make perfect sense.

And yet Singapore, one of the most successful countries at containing the spread of the virus, has left its schools open.

grundle

03-20-20 11:31 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by fujishig
(Post 13708355)

So she admits she doesn't know whether children get covid-19 because they usually don't show symptoms, and she admits that there's no evidence either way that they spread the virus, we should leave schools open? Yeah that's ok for an opinion piece. I'm surprised they can't do any testing on this but maybe using children in a study is off base? You'd think one way or another we'd know by now. But I'm fine with taking drastic measures until we know.

This part is laughable:

One, that's spoken like someone that doesn't have kids or has never dealt with a class full of kids. Two, if they are infectious and you check for fever and then send the kid home, it's too late, isn't it?

Those are all good points.

And I will add that telling children at school to stay six feet apart is insane.

I also think that doctors telling parents to tell their children not to touch their own face could potentially lead to psychological/mental health problems for the children later in life.

All that being said, I can't argue against the real world success that Singapore has had at containing the virus, all while keeping its schools open.

grundle

03-20-20 11:33 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
(Post 13708361)

Schools need to be closed. Period. They can have the virus and not have noticeable symptoms, then infect their household which normally has at least one elderly person commonly around the home. The numbers in Italy are so bad is because about 90% of the deaths...are elderly; like over 65 and who smoke and have COPD or similar issues.

The West Coast should be Stay At Home. All of it. Not just California. The West Coast is a festering hotbed which will move East at a high rate if not contained. California's gov get's it and was probably told by the CDC as we're finding out things.

Those are all good points. And I especially agree with your comment about the people in Italy.

And yet I am still curious to know how Singapore managed to be so successful at containing the spread of the virus while keeping their schools open.

DVD Polizei

03-20-20 11:47 AM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mabuse
(Post 13708377)

Singapore is a tiny little island nation. Comparing it to the US is crazy.

True, but there are some differences regardless of size differences of the countries, and the US needs to embrace what Singapore has seemed to accomplished. I responded to grundle about them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708375)

Those are all good points. And I especially agree with your comment about the people in Italy.

And yet I am still curious to know how Singapore managed to be so successful at containing the spread of the virus while keeping their schools open.

From what I understand, Singapore didn't let their infected patients back into the community (US hospitals were turning people away who were positive but not confirmed), they have a system where you have to SMS your location which should be at home if told to self-isolate (your phone is your GPS ankle bracelet per se), and basically they were paying attention to the virus back in December while the US and the rest of the world was more preoccupied with politics, which defocused efforts for two months or more.

Singapore seems to be more technologically aware of their patients, can track them better, and the people there just take their medical community more seriously than here in the US, where n the US... if a doc tells somebody to stay home...that person...on their "way home"...will go shopping at a crowded grocery store, go in a restaurant to get take out (this actually happened).

Psi

03-20-20 12:31 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708317)

Singapore has been repeatedly praised for its successful actions at limiting the spread of the virus.

Singapore's schools have not been closed.

This is an opinion column, but it's written by an expert in the field, and was published by the New York Times. I happen to agree with it. If anyone here disagrees with it, I'd be curious to hear your reason(s) for your disagreement.

- If you want to compare effectiveness of response, compare the whole package. Don't pick out one thing such as school closing and say, why don't we copy that? Copy everything until you know better.

- Singapore and the US are in different stages of the outbreak (they don't have one). A more similar case is Italy that is in a major crisis now, and they shut down their schools. Why not talk about that but pick Singapore which doesn't have a problem?

- As other folks have mentioned, kids may not get sick or die from Covid-19 but they could pick up the virus and bring it home where it kills Grandma. That concern is not new.

dex14

03-20-20 12:53 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Man... grundle must be happy as a pig in shit that Groucho created this and to be able to get a sweet taste of these types of threads.

funkyryno

03-20-20 01:03 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708240)

It seems to me that a supermarket would be a far more effective way to spread the virus than a movie theater. At the supermarket, you touch lots of things that have been touched by lots of other people, and you bump into lots of other people. Whereas at a movie theater, you're just sitting in your chair most of the time. As long as people are going to the supermarket anyway, I don't see any point in keeping movie theaters closed.

Dude, you'd be sitting in a chair that multiple people sat in over several days -- would you trust a 16-year-old kid to properly sanitize it? The virus can live on hard surfaces for an estimated 3 days. And that doesn't take into account any droplets from fellow moviegoers that are floating around, ready to land in your eyes.

Franchot

03-20-20 01:10 PM

Re: COVID-19 NON-POLITICAL Thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by grundle
(Post 13708242)

It seems that almost everyone who has died from this already had at least one kind of potentially fatal comorbidity.

Very, very few people who die have COVID-19 as their only serious illness.

A longtime employee of NBC News died after testing positive for coronavirus, the outlet reported Friday. Larry Edgeworth, a technician who worked in an equipment room at NBCUniversal’s headquarters in New York, died Thursday. He was 61.